@article {Tan658, author = {N Tan and I Brassington}, title = {Agency, duties and the {\textquotedblleft}Ashley treatment{\textquotedblright}}, volume = {35}, number = {11}, pages = {658--661}, year = {2009}, doi = {10.1136/jme.2009.029934}, publisher = {Institute of Medical Ethics}, abstract = {In 2006, a paper in the journal Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine described a novel case of growth attenuation therapy and other treatments carried out on Ashley, a severely cognitively, neurologically and physically disabled 6-year-old girl. Some of the moral arguments that have sprung up in respect of the so-called {\textquotedblleft}Ashley treatment{\textquotedblright} are considered, and it is suggested that they all miss something{\textemdash}that the proper treatment of Ashley may have as much to do with doctors{\textquoteright} duties to themselves as with their duties to her. It is suggested that the Ashley treatment may have been in violation of doctors{\textquoteright} self-regarding duties and that this possibility is worthy of further investigation.}, issn = {0306-6800}, URL = {https://jme.bmj.com/content/35/11/658}, eprint = {https://jme.bmj.com/content/35/11/658.full.pdf}, journal = {Journal of Medical Ethics} }